arxiv: v2 [math.rt] 22 May 2013

Transcription

1 A note on the local theta correspondence for unitary similitude dual pairs arxiv: v2 [math.rt] 22 May 2013 Chong Zhang April 9, 2018 Abstract ollowing Roberts work in the case of orthogonal-symplectic similitude dual pairs, we study the local theta correspondence for unitary similitude dual pairs over a p-adic field. 1 Introduction The local theta correspondence has been well studied for isometry groups. Meanwhile the theta correspondence for similitude groups is also important and useful. Roberts [Ro] (and others) studied the local theta correspondence (over a non-archimedean local field) in the orthogonal-symplectic case. In this short note, under the assumption (split): one of the hermitian and skew-hermitian spaces is split, we show that the method of [Ro] is also valid for the unitary case. We remark that part of our results may be known to experts, for example, see some works of M. Harris (e.g. [Ha1]). Since we could not find a literature for the statements and proofs of these results, we insist to write this note. After this note was written, Gan informed the author that [GT, Proposition 3.2] could show that Howe duality conjecture for isometry case implies Howe duality conjecture for similitude case for general dual pairs and the argument of multiplicity-freeness in [Ro] is not needed. Though only the case of quaternionic unitary groups is treated in [GT, Proposition 3.2], it is clear that the argument works generally for other dual pairs. In Section 2, we recall some notations and definitions that will be used later. In Section 3, we study the problem of splitting metaplectic covers of unitary similitude dual pairs. We show in Proposition 3.2 that this is not always available contrary to the isometry case. We also show that the preimage of the similitude dual pairs in the metaplectic cover are not always commute (cf. Proposition 3.3). Actually, the assumption (split) is only essentially used in this section. In Section 4, we study the Howe duality for the similitude groups. Our main result is Theorem Notations and assumptions Let be a p-adic field (i.e. a finite extension field of Q p ), and E be a quadratic extension field of. We will always assume p 2 in 4. Let ǫ E/ be the quadraticcharacterof associatedto E by the local classfield theory. Denote 1

2 by x x the non-trivial Galois automorphism of E/. Choose an element δ E such that δ = δ. Then := δ 2 and ǫ E/ (x) = (x, ), where (, ) is the Hilbert symbol for. We write N E/ for the norm map from E to. ix a non-trivial additive character ψ : C, and denote η = 1 2 ψ. Let (W,, ) (resp. (V,(, ))) be a non-degenerate skew hermitian (resp. hermitian) space over E with dim E W = n (resp. dim E V = m). Let H = GU(W) andg = GU(V)be the correspondingunitarysimilitude groups. Recall that h H if and only if h GL E (W) and there exists ν such that xh,yh = ν x,y for all x,y W. If h H, such ν is unique and will be denoted by ν(h). Thus we have the scale map ν : H. The group G = GU(V) is defined similarly, and we still use ν to denote the scale map G. Denote H 1 = U(W) and G 1 = U(V), which are the kernels of ν. Since the distinguish between hermitian space and skew-hermitian space is not essential, we will assume that (split): W is split. In other words, there is a complete polarization W = X + Y, where X and Y are maximal isotropic subspaces of W. Attached to (V,W), there is a symplectic space W = V E W over, equipped with the symplectic form, = 1 ( ) 2 Tr E/ (, ),. There is a natural embedding ι : G H GSp(W), (v w)ι(g,h) = (g 1 v wh), where GSp(W) is the symplectic similitude group attached to W (note that we write the action of GSp(W) or Sp(W) on right). We denote by ι V : H GSp(W) and ι W : G GSp(W) the restrictions of ι on H and G. Let Mp(W) be the metaplectic cover of Sp(W), which is a non-trivial C 1 - central extension of Sp(W). or the fixed additive character ψ, let ω ψ be the smooth Weil representation of Mp(W). or convenience, we recall some notations used for the (strong) Howe duality (cf. [Ro]). LetAandB betwogroupsoftd-typewithcountablebases,and(ρ,s) be a smooth representation of A B. or a group J of td-type with countable bases, denote by Irr(J) the set of equivalence classes of irreducible admissible representations of J. or π Irr(A), put S(π) = S/ f Hom A(ρ,π) Ker(f). It is a smooth representation of A B, and there exists a smooth representation Θ(π) of B, unique up to isomorphism, such that S(π) π Θ(π) (cf. [MVW]). Denote by R(A) the set of equivalence classes of π Irr(A) such that S(π) 0, and denote R(B) analogously. We say that strong Howe duality holds for ρ if for every π R(A) the representation Θ(π) has a unique nonzero irreducible quotient θ(π), and analogous statement holds for every τ R(B). We say that Howe duality holds for ρ if the set {(π,τ) R(A) R(B) : Hom A B (ρ,π τ) 0} is the graph of a bijection between R(A) and R(B). It is known that strong Howe duality implies Howe duality. 3 The splitting Notice that we assume W is split with dim E W = n = 2r, that is there is a complete polarization W = X +Y. Let X = V E X and Y = V E Y. Then 2

3 X+Y is a complete polarization of W. If necessary we write the elements of H or GSp(W) as matrices with respect to these polarizations. Let GMp(W) be the metaplectic cover of GSp(W) (cf. [Ba]), which is an extension of GSp(W) by C 1 : 1 C 1 GMp(W) pr GSp(W) 1. Then GMp(W) GSp(W) C 1 as sets, and the group law can be written as (g,z) (g,z ) = (gg,c(g,g )zz ), where g,g GSp(W), z,z C 1, and C : GSp(W) GSp(W) C 1 is the cocycle function. The cocycle C can be computed explicitly as follows (cf. [Ba, 1.2]). There is an action of on( Sp(W) defined) by s y = d(y) 1 sd(y), where s Sp(W), y 1mn 0 and d(y) =. or g GSp(W), denote 0 y 1 mn g 1 = d(ν(g)) 1 g Sp(W). Then we have (3.1) C(g,g ) = c Y (g ν(g ) 1,g 1 )µ(ν(g ),g 1 ), where c Y (g 1,g 1 ) = γ (η L(Y,Yg 1 1,Yg 1 )), and µ : Sp(W) C 1 is the functions defined by (3.2) µ(y,s) = (x(s),y) γ (y,η) j(s). or convenience we recall some of the notations appeared above. or the triple of Lagrangians (Y,Yg 1 1,Yg 1 ), L(Y,Yg 1 1,Yg 1 ) is its Leray invariant, which is a quadratic space over (cf. [Ra] for the definitions). or a quadratic space q over and an additive character η, γ (η q) is the Weil index associated to q and η. or y, γ (y,η) is defined to be γ(yη x2 ) γ (η x 2 ), where yη(x) := η(yx). Let {e 1,...,e mn,e 1,...,e mn} be a basis of W such that {e 1,...,e mn } X, {e 1,...,e mn } Y, e i,e j = e i,e j = 0 and e i,e j = δ ij for 1 i,j mn. Let P Y be the parabolic subgroup of Sp(W) stabilizing Y. Then where τ j is defined to be Sp(W) = mn j=0 P Y τ j P Y, (3.3) e i τ j = e i, and e i τ j = e i, if i {1,...,j}, e i τ j = e i, and e i τ j = e i, otherwise, and τ 0 := id. Thus for s = p 1 τ j p 2 Sp(W) with p 1,p 2 P Y, define x(s) := det(p 1 p 2 Y ) in / 2 and j(s) := j. Now we study the preimages pr 1 (G) and pr 1 (H) in GMp(W). or this, we need some preparations. Let {e 1,...,e r,e 1,...,e r } be a basis of W such that {e 1,...,e r } X, {e 1,...,e r } Y, e i,e j = e i,e j = 0 and e i,e j = δ ij for 1 i,j r. Let P Y be the parabolic subgroup of H 1 stabilizing Y. Then we have Bruhat decomposition H 1 = r i=0 P Yτ j P Y, where τ j is defined in the same way as (3.3). or h = p 1 τ j p 2 H 1 with p 1,p 2 P Y, define x(h) := det(p 1 p 2 Y ) 3

4 in E /N E/ (E ) and j(h) := j. Recall that, fixing a character χ : E C such that χ = ǫ m E/, there is a splitting homomorphism (cf. [Ku, 3]) ι V,χ : H 1 Mp(W) Sp(W) C 1, h ι V,χ (h) = (ι V (h),β V,χ (h)), where β V,χ (h) = χ(x(h))γ (η RV) j(h) and RV is the underlying 2m dimensional vector space with quadratic form 1 2 Tr E/(, ). Recall that we have the relation: (3.4) c Y (ι V (h),ι V (h )) = β V,χ (h) 1 β V,χ (h ) 1 β V,χ (hh ), h,h H 1. Meanwhile, there is a natural splitting ι W : G 1 Mp(W) Sp(W) C 1, g (ι W (g),1). Similarly as GSp(W), for y and h H 1, define ( ) 1r 0 d(y) =, and h y = d(y) 1 hd(y) H 0 y 1 1. r or h H, denote h 1 = d(ν(h)) 1 h H 1. The following lemma will be used in the proof of Proposition 3.2. It can be checked by linear algebra, and we omit the proof. Lemma 3.1. or h H 1 and y, we have 1. x(h y ) = x(h)y j(h) and j(h y ) = j(h); 2. x(ι V (h)) = N E/ (x(h)) m ( ) mj(h) and j(ι V (h)) = 2mj(h). Proposition 3.2. As an extension of H, pr 1 (H) is trivial if m is even. As an extension of G, pr 1 (G) is trivial. Proof. or h H, it is easy to see that ι V (h) 1 = ι V (h 1 ) and ν(h) = ν(ι V (h)). or h,h H, by (3.1) and (3.4), we have C(ι V (h),ι V (h )) = c Y (ι V (h 1 ) ν(h ),ι V (h 1 )) µ(ν(h ),ι V (h 1 )) Since = c Y (ι V (h ν(h ) 1 ),ι V (h 1)) µ(ν(h ),ι V (h 1 )) = β V,χ (h ν(h ) 1 ) 1 β V,χ (h 1 ) 1 β V,χ (h ν(h ) 1 h 1 ) µ(ν(h ),ι V (h 1 )). h ν(h ) 1 h 1 = d(ν(h )) 1 d(ν(h)) 1 hd(ν(h )) d(ν(h )) 1 h = (hh ) 1, we have β V,χ (h ν(h ) 1 h 1) = β V,χ ((hh ) 1 ). On the other hand, by (3.2) and Lemma 3.1,we have µ(ν(h ),ι V (h 1 )) = (x(ι V (h 1 )),ν(h )) γ (ν(h j(ιv (h1)) ),η) = (N E/ (x(h 1 )),ν(h )) m (,ν(h )) mj(h1) γ (ν(h ),η) 2mj(h1) = (N E/ (x(h 1 )),ν(h )) m (,ν(h )) mj(h1) ( 1,ν(h )) mj(h1) = (N E/ (x(h 1 )),ν(h )) m (,ν(h )) mj(h1), 4

5 and β V,χ (h ν(h ) 1 ) = χ(x(h ν(h ) 1 ))γ (η RV) j(hν(h ) 1 ) = χ(x(h 1 )ν(h ) j(h1) )γ (η RV) j(h1) Thus we have = χ(x(h 1 ))γ (η RV) j(h1) ǫ mj(h1) E/ (ν(h )) = β V,χ (h 1 )(ν(h ), ) mj(h1). β V,χ (h ν(h ) 1 ) 1 µ(ν(h ),ι V (h 1 )) = β V,χ (h 1 ) 1 (N E/ (x(h 1 )),ν(h )) m. It follows that C(ι V (h),ι V (h )) = β V,χ (h 1 ) 1 β V,χ (h 1 ) 1 β V,χ ((hh ) 1 ) (N E/ (x(h 1 )),ν(h )) m. Therefore pr 1 (H) is a trivial C 1 -extension if m is even. or g G, it is easy to see that ν(ι W (g)) = ν(g) 1 and x(ι W (g) 1 ) = N E/ (detg) r. or g,g G, we have C(ι W (g),ι W (g )) = c Y (ι W (g) ν(g ) 1 1,ι W (g ) 1 ) µ(ν(g ) 1,ι W (g) 1 ) = µ(ν(g ) 1,ι W (g) 1 ) = (ν(g ) 1,N E/ (detg) r ) = (ν(g),ν(g )) mr, since ι W (g) 1 P Y and N E/ (detg) = ν(g) m. Then the conclusion follows from the relation (ν(g),ν(g )) = γ (ν(g),η) 1 γ (ν(g ),η) 1 γ (ν(gg ),η). Proposition 3.3. pr 1 (H) and pr 1 (G) commute in GMp(W) if and only if m is even. Proof. or g G and h H, if pr( g) = g and pr( h) = h, we can write g = (ι W (g),z) and h = (ι V (h),z ). It is easy to see that the commutator of g and h is [ g, h] = C(ι W(g),ι V (h)) C(ι V (h),ι W (g)). Then we have C(ι W (g),ι V (h)) = c Y (ι W (g) ν(h) 1,ι V (h 1 ))µ(ν(h),ι W (g) 1 ) = (N E/ (det(g)),ν(h)) r = (ν(g),ν(h)) mr, and C(ι V (h),ι W (g)) = c Y (ι V (h 1 ) ν(g) 1,ι W (g) 1 )µ(ν(g) 1,ι V (h 1 )) = µ(ν(g) 1,ι V (h 1 )) = (N E/ (x(h 1 )),ν(g) 1 ) m (,ν(g) 1 ) mj(h1). Hence pr 1 (H) and pr 1 (G) commute in GMp(W) if and only if m is even. 5

6 4 Howe duality Let ω ψ be the smooth Weil representation of Mp(W). Using the fixed splitting homomorphismsasinthe previoussection, wehavethe Weil representationω ψ,χ of G 1 H 1. We simply denote by ω for ω ψ or ω ψ,χ. Let Ω = ind GMp(W) Mp(W) ω be the compactly induced representation, and recall that there is an one extra variable Schrödinger model S(X ) of Ω (cf. [Ba, 1.3]). If m = dim E V is even, by Proposition 3.2 and Proposition 3.3, Ω can be viewed as a representation of G H. However, when m is odd, the above method of constructing representation is not available. or general m, we have the following construction (cf. [Ro, 3]). Let R = { (g,h) G H ν(g) = ν(h)} be a subgroup of G H and also a subgroup of Sp(W). We can extend the Weil representation ω G1 H 1 to R, and still denote it by ω. Let H + = { h H ν(h) ν(g)}. Then H + = H when m is even; [H : H + ] = 2 when m is odd. Let Ω + = ind G H+ R ω be the compactly induced representation, which is a smooth representation of G H +. Remark 4.1. If m is even, we thus have two representations Ω + and Ω of G H. However it can be shown that Ω + Ω, by the same arguments of [Ro, Proposition 3.5]. Remark 4.2. If W (resp. V) is an arbitrary skew-hermitian (resp. hermitian) space, we can define H + with respect to V (resp. G + with respect to W), the subgroup R of G + H +, and the representation Ω + = ind G+ H + R ω in the same way. By such a construction, we can consider the (strong) Howe duality for the representation Ω + of G H +. Theorem 4.3. If p > 2, the strong Howe duality holds for Ω +. Proof. If p > 2, Waldspurger [Wa] proved that the strong Howe duality holds for ω G1 H 1. The centers of G, H + are both isomorphic to E, and there are isomorphisms: G/E G 1 R/E (G 1 H 1 ) H + /E H 1, where we use E to denote the centers of G and H +, and embed E into R diagonally (then E lies in the center of R). Notice that the cardinality of the above quotient groups is no more than 2. Thus, for π Irr(H + ), we have either π H1 ρ 0 being irreducible or π H1 ρ 1 ρ2 where ρ i Irr(H 1 ) are pairwise inequivalent. Then it can be checked that the arguments in Section 4 and 5 of [Ro] can also be applied to our situation, and the conclusion follows. More precisely, for π Irr(H + ), if π H1 ρ i so that ρ i Irr(H 1 ), then θ(π) = θ(ρ i ) where θ(ρ i ) Irr(G 1 ). 6

7 Remark 4.4. If W is arbitrary (i.e. not necessary split), applying the above arguments again and noting the key relation G + /E G 1 R/E (G 1 H 1 ) H + /E H 1, we can show that if p > 2 then the (strong) Howe duality holds for Ω +. Asin [Ro, 6], when mis odd, wecan alsoconsiderthe (strong)howeduality for the compactly induced representation Ω = ind G H R ω. As same as the orthogonal-symplectic case, the (strong) Howe duality for Ω is equivalent to the theta dichotomy for unitary isometry dual pairs. We explain this phenomenon briefly. Up to isometry, there are two different hermitian spaces over E of dimension m 1: V ± defined by ǫ(v ± ) = ǫ E/ (( 1) m(m 1) 2 detv ± ) = ±1. To avoid confusion, we write R(H 1,V ± ) to emphasize its dependence on V ±. Applying the same arguments of [Ro, Lemma 6.1], we have the following principle for the (strong) Howe duality for Ω. Proposition 4.5. Assume p > 2. Then the (strong) Howe duality holds for Ω if and only if R(H 1,V + ) R(H 1,V ) =. Remark 4.6. It is conjectured in [HKS] that for m n, R(H 1,V + ) R(H 1,V ) =, which is called theta dichotomy. Theta dichotomy has been proved (cf. [Ha2, Theorem 2.1.7]) under the assumption of the so called weak conservation relation. Recently, Sun and Zhu [SZ] proved the so called conservation relation for all type I irreducible dual pairs and all local fields of characteristic zero. In summary, theta dichotomy has been proved. It is also known that for m 2n, R(H 1,V + ) R(H 1,V ). Thus the Howe duality does not hold for Ω when m 2n. Acknowledgements This paper is part of the author s thesis in He expresses his sincere gratitude to Professor Linsheng Yin and Professor Ye Tian for their constant encouragement and support. The author would like to thank Professor Wee Teck Gan for his comments and mention of[gt, Proposition 3.2], and would like to thank the referees for their careful readings of the manuscript and many comments leading to a much improved exposition. References [Ba] L. Barthel, Local Howe correspondence for groups of similitudes, J. reine angew. Math. 414, (1991). [GT] W. T. Gan, W. Tantono, The local Langlands conjecture for GSp(4) II: the case of inner forms, preprint. 7

8 [Ha1] [Ha2] M. Harris, L-functions of 2 2 unitary groups and factorization of periods of Hilbert modular forms, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 6, (1993). M. Harris, Cohomological automorphic forms on unitary groups, II: period relations and values of L-functions, in Harmonic analysis, Group Representations, Automorphic orms and Invariant Theory: In Honor of Roger E. Howe, vol. 12, , Lecture Notes Series, Institue for Mathematical Sciences, National University of Singapore, World Scientific Publishing, [HKS] M. Harris, S. Kudla, S. Sweet, Theta dichotomy for unitary groups, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 9, (1996). [Ku] S. Kudla, Splitting metaplectic covers of dual reductive pairs, Israel J. Math. 87, (1994). [MVW] C. Moeglin, M.-. Vigénras, J.-L. Waldspurger, Correspondances de Howe sur un corps p-adique, Lecture Notes in Math. 1291, Springer- Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York (1987). [Ra] [Ro] [SZ] [Wa] R. R. Rao, On some explicit formulas in the theory of Weil representation, Pacific J. Math. 157, (1993). B. Roberts, The theta correspondence for similitudes, Israel J. Math. 94, (1996). B. Sun, C.-B. Zhu, Conservation relations for local theta correspondence, arxiv: J.-L. Waldspurger, Démonstration d une conjecture de dualité de Howe dans le cas p-adique, p 2, in: estschrift in honor of Piatetski- Shapiro, Israel Math. Conf. Proc., vol. 2, (1990). Chong Zhang Academy of Mathematics and System Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, , PR China. address: zhangchong02@gmail.com 8